Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42199492›Full record

ArticleBladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Proceedings of the first international NMIBC consensus classification meeting.

Joep J de Jong, Ane Moreno-Oya, Mitchell Olislagers, Florus C de Jong, Sia V Lindskrog, Anshita Goel, Roland Arnold, Richard T Bryan, Pontus Eriksson, Gottfrid Sjödahl and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Joep J de JongErasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2378-367X
Ane Moreno-OyaGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Centre-CNIO, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1296-763X
Mitchell OlislagersErasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Florus C de JongErasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Sia V LindskrogDepartment of Molecular Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Anshita GoelBladder Cancer Research Centre, Department of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Roland ArnoldBladder Cancer Research Centre, Department of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Richard T BryanBladder Cancer Research Centre, Department of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Pontus ErikssonDivision of Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Gottfrid SjödahlDepartment of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Murat AkandDepartment of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Loic BaekelandtDepartment of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Tahlita C M ZuiverloonErasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Sebastien RinaldettiThe Department of Hemato-Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
J Alberto Nakauma-GonzalezErasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9153-4280

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a biologically and clinically heterogeneous disease, accounting for approximately 75% of bladder cancer cases. Over the past decade, multiple RNA-based molecular classification systems for NMIBC have been proposed, demonstrating associations with tumor stage, grade, prognosis, and treatment response. However, unlike muscle-invasive bladder cancer, a unified consensus classification for NMIBC is lacking, limiting clinical translation and cross-study comparability. To address this gap, the first NMIBC Consensus Classification Meeting was convened in November 2024 at Erasmus University Medical Center, bringing together 13 international experts from seven countries representing major NMIBC molecular classification efforts. This report summarizes the discussions, comparative evaluation of existing classification systems, and the agreed strategy towards developing a consensus molecular model. The meeting focused on harmonizing heterogeneous transcriptomic datasets, integrating RNA sequencing and microarray platforms, and assessing the applicability of classification models across tumor stages (Ta/T1) and grades. Key features, strengths, and limitations of the Lund Taxonomy, Leeds, Birmingham, UROMOL, and Rotterdam (BCG response) subtypes were critically examined. Building on prior experience from the muscle-invasive bladder cancer consensus, participants agreed on a centroid-based clustering framework using rigorously defined core samples to derive stable consensus subtypes and a single-sample classifier with associated probability scores. A large, curated dataset encompassing approximately 2500 NMIBC samples from published cohorts will facilitate model development and validation. The resulting consensus classification aims to improve biological understanding, facilitate reproducibility across studies, and enable future evaluation of prognostic and therapeutic relevance, including response to intravesical BCG therapy.

Indexed as

bioinformaticsbiomarkerbladder cancer

Identifiers

PMID42199492
PMCPMC13199688

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.